Karen Capato Case Summary

Only twenty years ago, embryo freezing (cryopreservation) was considered a technique that raised “disturbing,” “extremely difficult,” “incredibly complex,” and even “nightmarish” ethical issues. Currently, however, at least 41 of the 169 infertility clinics in the United States have begun to implement in vitro fertilization protocols (IVF) (Freemann et al., 1986). The number of frozen embryos in this country nearly tripled, from 289 to 824, between 1985 and 1986 (Van Steirteghem and Van Den Abbel, 1988). An estimated ten infants in the U.S. and sixty in the world were born as of 1988 after having been frozen as embryos. The government and professional advisory groups have endorsed embryo

As stated earlier, Christians must evaluate the different methods of medical technology in order to identify the moral and ethical ramifications of certain medical procedures. I believe that any procedure that forces a couple to decide what is to be done with “leftover” embryos should not be used. However, there are some procedures such as IUI and IVF that utilize

King first touches on the topic of in vitro fertilization and the opportunities it offers for couples who cannot conceive naturally. She goes on to discuss the topic of research on the human embryos that does not get implanted into the woman’s body. Research is being

The themes surrounding abortion tend to generally scathe on a surface level and truly uncover all the underlying themes of the popular topic, the articles “Stem Cells, Sex and Procreation” by John Harris, “A Defense of Abortion” by Judith Thomson, and “Are Pregnant Women Fetal Containers?” by Laura Purdy all discuss the theme of the woman’s and fetuses health and the consequences that can come with both keeping and rejecting the a fetus.

The first child born through in vitro fertilization was born in 1978. Despite the amount of time that has passed from then to now, in vitro is still very much experimental. Although there has been improvement in the probability that the patient will bear a child since the end of 1980 where in a study only 5.4% of cases were successful (Bernholz, 1984), going through the process of in vitro fertilization still does not guarantee a child. In the beginning stages where in vitro fertilization was fairly new, there was some push back, especially morally. Many thought that it was wrong for scientists to “play God” and create life. As with anything else, the times have changes and so have many people’s opinions. Although nearly impossible for all people to agree on one topic, the use of in vitro fertilization has become more widely accepted for patients who deal with infertility issues.

Many women are eager to become a mother, but infertility prevents some women from satisfying this need. To counter this widespread problem, we develop reproductive choices. One of the most important choices is in vitro fertilization. Even though this method significantly increases pregnancy rate in infertile women, it comes with the problem. Underlying in vitro fertilization is research on living human embryos. We need to research on countless living embryos in order to develop clinical in vitro fertilization. This stirs public attention on its morality. Society asks: Are we killing thousands of human life while we are developing method to give birth to other ones? This question is crucial because it is asking very foundation of our

With the increase in the abilities and forms of reproductive technologies over the past 30 years, the ethics of using them still needs to be further understood. An example of a new form of reproductive technology is surrogacy. The act of a woman conceiving and carrying an embryo or fetus for an individual or a couple is defined as surrogacy (White, 2016). The ethics of this method of reproduction with the nuances of potential payment options and the effects on the parties involved, has to evolve with the updates in technology and knowledge. The controversy surrounding surrogacy is in relation to the legality and ethics of paying a surrogate mother to carry and birth a child for an individual or couple.

In the article “Egg Heads”, the writer Kathryn Lopez addresses the controversial topic of in-vitro fertilization. Lopez created this article to argue her stance that IVF is dangerous to a woman’s health, families, and damaging to societal views on human life. Her first goal is to educate readers of all the things that donors have to go through in order to donate their eggs. Her second goal is to explain the dangers of IVF on a woman’s body, family, and society. Kathryn Lopez achieves these goals through her successful use of logos and pathos.

Regulation on IVF and other fertility services is necessary. The procedures being done are medical, psychological, and controversial enough to receive federal attention. When a human being is made in a lab, laws need to exist in case a couple divorces, changes their mind, or to prevent immoral decisions in the future. Becoming a parent is an understandable human right, nonetheless the desire of conceiving a child of one’s own can get out of hand. Yearning can lead to selfish decision making. Customers in the fertility clinics are desperate and will do anything they can to have a

paragraphs I seek to analyze how our society’s immense expectations create these feelings. Along with this I intend to look at the differences in perception of the infertility

The principle of nonmaleficence, to do no harm, in reproductive technology can be applied to the prospective parents and the prospective child-the embryo. The procedures involved in attempting to impregnate a woman can be physically and emotionally damaging, but rewarding if done successfully. But the parties must first determine to what extent and at what cost will they risk to achieve their ultimate goal. It would cause great harm physically to the embryos if there were multiple unsuccessful attempts, but many would argue that the end outweighs the means, that it is worth it if the result was a viable pregnancy and healthy child.

For lesbian couples, one partner can choose to donate their egg and the other will carry the embryo. Gay couples and single men can start their families with the mix of donor eggs, their sperm, and a surrogate mother to carry the embryo. With the use of IVF,, the embryo is then implanted into the gestational surrogate. Embryos can also be cryogenically frozen by using frozen embryo technology, or FET, for future possibilities. Couples can choose to have more children when ready, but when parents choose not to, or are unable to, have more, frozen embryos that are not used by the couple have many more options than being thawed and thrown away. The top option picked is to donate the unused embryos to couples that cannot have children. The next highest option is to donate the embryos to a research facility to be used for science. Stem Cell research also allows for the possible cure for many diseases and, although very controversial, will be very helpful in the future, but does unfortunately use embryos. But the donation of embryos to the facilities will be of total consent of the parents and will not waste unused

Throughout the research performed on women that performed in-vitro fertilization, there are many biological and ethical concerns that are discussed. The complication that arise from IVF could be fatal to the mother and the child, which defeats the purpose of the procedure. Furthermore, the age of IVF mothers is greater than the average age of naturally conceived mothers, which contributes to the increased complications (2, 4). Lastly, the rate of multiple sacs is larger in IVF mothers as a result of greater number of embryos transferred to the uterus (4). These concerns could resolved by placing more restrictive laws regarding the actual process and the amount of embryos transferred. Further, complications could be decreased by implementing

IVF raises many of these difficult moral issues. If the above conceptions about the nature of ethics were correct, however, discussion of these issues would either be futile (because morality is a matter of personal choice or opinion) or superfluous (because morality is what a divine or secular authority says it is) (Walters 23). In this paper, I want to suggest that it is not only possible, but also necessary to inquire into the ethics of such practices as IVF because the fact that we can do something does not mean that we ought to do it.

Although many couples partake in freezing their embryos, others find it inhumane and unnatural. Many see it as freezing a baby and correlate it to the subject of abortion. Some couples see the act of freezing embryos to later have them transferred into the mother’s uterus as unnatural, for intercourse did not take place in the creation of the fetus. Another issue couples have is that freezing embryos and transferring them is a costly deed. Couples also suffer with the fear of having the embryos switched during the